The sick will suffer most under Kwarteng’s mini-Budget

How does the NHS deal with the brutal squeeze this will impose at a time of surging demand, with a winter of flu and new Covid variants ahead of it?

We’ve already seen the outcome on the markets Kwasi Kwarteng’s train wreck of a mini-Budget. But there’s more evidence to show just how the sick will suffer most.

Does that sound extreme? An example of overly emotional, hyperbolic clickbait? Au contraire. I can justify it. Warning: it’s not very fashionable these days, but I’m going to include some science to show how the sick will suffer most under this new Tory government.

Let’s turn to the subject of squeezed health budgets and their impact on people with diabetes – which is something I have direct experience of. I have Type 1, a genetic condition caused by an autoimmune foul-up that destroys the insulin producing cells in one’s pancreas. T1 hit me at the age of two, which is very early by the standards of the condition. It usually makes itself known in adolescence, but can sometimes strike later. Former prime minister Theresa May would be an example of the latter.

The much more common Type 2 has a variety of sometimes lifestyle-related causes and can, in some cases, be controlled through diet and exercise. Labour’s former deputy leader Tom Watson did just that.

As both politicians will now be painfully aware, it is a condition that can royally mess you up, regardless of type. I use that term advisedly: potential complications include blindness, kidney disease, amputations, heart problems, liver problems. I could go on, but just writing this is making me sweat.

These are things that those of us in the pancreatically-challenged tribe prefer not to think too hard about, otherwise the mere sight of a chocolate bar could turn us into quivering wrecks in need of treatment for PTSD, on top of everything else.

To help prevent this, we (and I’m including both types here) are supposed to receive eight regular checks, including one’s blood sugar (obviously), blood pressure, circulation (via a foot check), weight, lifestyle, liver and kidney function, eyes – and so on. People in possession of that apparently elusive virtue known as empathy will understand why this is important: health horrors are avoidable with good control and regular monitoring. Diabetes can be fatal in their absence.

People who lack empathy, perhaps as Kwasi Kwarteng appears to, might care to consider that treating the side effects of diabetes can be very expensive. Check-ups literally save lives. There is solid evidence for this. In August, the Lancet published a study of non-Covid related mortality among people with diabetes through the course of the pandemic, when these checks fell away.

“Our results show an increased risk of mortality in those who did not receive all eight care processes in one or both of the previous two years,” the researchers concluded.

It goes without saying that check-ups also cut costs. Look at it this way: if deaths rose, so must complications requiring treatment. I’ll leave you to decide which is the more important: people’s health outcomes or costs.

The study identified problems before the advent of the pandemic, during which (2020-21) just 26.5 per cent of the group studied received all eight health checks. Only 48.1 per cent the same group received them in 2018-2019.

This tallies with the results of a survey of 10,000 people with the condition conducted by Diabetes UK. Almost half (47 per cent) of the respondents reported difficulties with managing it. Three in five (63 per cent) of them attributed this, at least in part, to not having sufficient access to their healthcare teams; rising to 71 per cent of those in the most deprived areas of the country.

I was first motivated to look into this when I received my third cancellation from Barts NHS Trust,  which was supposed to have been a telephone-only affair. Partly because of Covid, I haven’t seen a doctor at my local hospital since, well I can’t remember. The message from Barts, the NHS and the government appears to be: you’re on your own, kiddo. C’est la vie.

The consequences for me are that I’ve missed out on the roll out of a new piece of blood monitoring kit, so remain a human pin cushion; constantly pricking my finger to test my blood sugar. I’ve been doing that for as long as I can remember. C’est la vie (again). But for some people this lack of care is dangerous. Some – as the Lancet study shows – will die.

What’s all this got to do with Kwasi Kwarteng? Well, Kwarteng has cut corporation tax so companies can make more profits. He’s also cut national insurance, which helps wealthier people the most.

The cost of the former, part of an unfunded £43bn package of tax cuts, comes to just under £19bn. The cost of the spending cuts Kwarteng is poised to enact through not uprating departmental budgets to take account of inflation? RoughLy £18bn.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment, sign up to our free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here

How does the NHS deal with the brutal squeeze this will impose at a time of surging demand, with a winter of flu and new Covid variants ahead of it? I think we all know: cancelled operations, longer waiting lists, longer waits at A&E, fewer staff, and finally, more cancelled appointments.

I’ve focused on diabetes to illustrate the problem, but this will impact upon people with a wide variety of health issues, which should be treatable and manageable with proper care.

Those spending cuts are the direct consequence of a political choice he and his boss Liz Truss have made and that the government will endorse, in the absence of a backbench rebellion.

I’d say Lord save us, but if there is someone upstairs, they’re probably wringing their hands in despair at the conduct of this dismal duo too.